Old English Declensions in Reference to Contemporary German Declensions

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Old English Declensions in Reference to Contemporary German Declensions Old English Declensions in Reference to Contemporary German Declensions Hradel, Miroslav Undergraduate thesis / Završni rad 2018 Degree Grantor / Ustanova koja je dodijelila akademski / stručni stupanj: University of Zadar / Sveučilište u Zadru Permanent link / Trajna poveznica: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:162:269161 Rights / Prava: In copyright Download date / Datum preuzimanja: 2021-09-30 Repository / Repozitorij: University of Zadar Institutional Repository of evaluation works Sveučilište u Zadru Odjel za anglistiku Preddiplomski studij engleskoga jezika i književnosti Miroslav Hradel Old English Declensions in Reference to Contemporary German Declensions Završni rad Zadar, 2018. Sveučilište u Zadru Odjel za anglistiku Preddiplomski studij engleskoga jezika i književnosti Old English Declensions in Reference to Contemporary German Declensions Završni rad Student/ica: Mentor/ica: Miroslav Hradel doc. Lidija Štrmelj Zadar, 2018. Izjava o akademskoj čestitosti Ja, Miroslav Hradel, ovime izjavljujem da je moj završni rad pod naslovom Old English Declensions in Reference to Contemporary German Declensions rezultat mojega vlastitog rada, da se temelji na mojim istraživanjima te da se oslanja na izvore i radove navedene u bilješkama i popisu literature. Ni jedan dio mojega rada nije napisan na nedopušten način, odnosno nije prepisan iz necitiranih radova i ne krši bilo čija autorska prava. Izjavljujem da ni jedan dio ovoga rada nije iskorišten u kojem drugom radu pri bilo kojoj drugoj visokoškolskoj, znanstvenoj, obrazovnoj ili inoj ustanovi. Sadržaj mojega rada u potpunosti odgovara sadržaju obranjenoga i nakon obrane uređenoga rada. Zadar, 2. srpanj 2018. Hradel 4 Table of contents: 1. Introduction ..........…………………………………………………………………………. 5 2. The Common Origin of English and German ………………………..……………………. 6 3. Case, Gender and Number ………...............................………………..…………………. 10 4. Pronouns ………………………………………………………………………………….. 14 5. Articles …………………………………………………………………………………… 18 6. Nouns ………………………………………………………………………….................. 19 7. Adjectives …………………………………………………………………….................... 29 8. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………...................... 34 9. Works Cited ………………………………………………………………………......... 35 10. OLD ENGLISH DECLENSIONS IN REFERENCE TO CONTEMPORARY GERMAN DECLENSIONS: Summary and key words…………..……...........................…………....... 37 11. STAROENGLESKA SKLONIDBA U ODNOSU NA SUVREMENU NJEMAČKU SKLONIDBU: Sažetak i ključne riječi…………….......................................................……. 38 Hradel 5 1. Introduction The opening chapter of the paper focuses on explaining the common origin of English and German, historically two closely related languages in the West Germanic group of the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language family. The starting point for the main part of the paper, therefore, is the assumption that there is a significant number of grammatical features that are shared between the oldest recorded form of the English language and the current form of the German language, even though they are separated from each other by roughly a thousand years of history. The paper uses a combination of the diachronic, comparative and contrastive methods. In other words, Old English pronouns, articles, nouns and adjectives are compared and contrasted with their equivalents and cognates in contemporary German. The main aim of the paper is to define and attempt to explain the similarities and differences that appear when the two stages in the respective development of English and German are considered. Due to the vast temporal gap between Old English and contemporary German, the paper ignores the influence of the Norman Conquest on the development of the English language, except for the fact that it does attempt to clarify which of the typically Germanic, or West Germanic, grammatical features English lacks in its contemporary form. The basics of some of the phonological changes that affected the Germanic languages are discussed within the opening chapter, mainly to give an insight into the similarities and differences in pronunciation, but also because the phonemic environment often seems to correlate with the choice of inflectional endings in both Old English and contemporary German. Hradel 6 2. The Common Origin of English and German Within the Indo-European language family, English and German not only both belong to the same branch, the Germanic one, but also to the same group within it, the West Germanic one. Like all the West Germanic languages, Dutch being the third major one, they have been descended from a number of closely related dialects that were spoken among the Germanic tribes populating the lowlands along the south-eastern coast of the North Sea at the beginning of the Common Era. A few centuries earlier, the Germanic tribes collectively formed a homogeneous cultural and linguistic group. The common language they spoke was the unattested and hypothetical primordial Germanic language that is now referred to as Proto- Germanic. The original range of its speakers encompassed what is presently southern Sweden, the entire state of Denmark, and northern Germany between the Elbe and the Oder. The movement of some of the Germanic tribes away from these regions led to the dialectal diversification of Proto-Germanic, consequently splitting the Germanic languages into three groups. In addition to the West Germanic one, these three groups include the North Germanic and East Germanic ones. The North Germanic languages of the present time are Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic and Faroese. They have been descended from the dialects that were spoken among the Germanic tribes that stayed within the geographical borders of Scandinavia, with Old Norse being their earliest recorded form. The East Germanic languages began as a group of dialects that were spoken among the Germanic tribes that expanded east of the Oder, all the way to the coast of the Black Sea. They became extinct in the seventeenth century, but the only attested language belonging to the group, Gothic, remains a valuable asset in historical linguistics as the earliest Germanic language recorded in literary use, thanks to a fragmentary translation of the Bible that was done in the fourth century AD (Auberle and Klosa 194-195; Barber 85-91). Hradel 7 The expansion of the West Germanic tribes to Britain began around the middle of the fifth century AD. Therefore, this happens to be the point in history that is commonly given as the beginning of the Old English period, even though it is virtually impossible to speak of Old English as a more or less uniform language until two or three centuries later. This earliest recorded form of the English language, also known as Anglo-Saxon, possibly developed from a unique Anglo-Frisian language, that is a group of mutually intelligible dialects. Frisian, nowadays a minority language in the northern regions of both the Netherlands and Germany, is still commonly mentioned as the closest linguistic relative of English. Another closely related language is Old Saxon. It is the earliest recorded predecessor of Low German, which is presently spoken in northern Germany and sometimes considered to be a separate language from both German and Dutch. The most prestigious dialect of Old English is known as West Saxon. Considering the fact that it was the dialect in which nearly all literary texts were written between the ninth and eleventh centuries AD, West Saxon, that is the late variety of it, is used as the basis for studying the grammar and vocabulary of Old English in the present time (Barber 89-90; Cassidy and Ringler 1-3; Quirk and Wrenn 1-6). Some of the West Germanic tribes continued to move further towards the south, concentrating in the regions adjacent to the Rhine and eventually expanding all the way to the Alps. Their migration is believed to have stopped by the end of the sixth century AD, by which time the dialects they spoke had started to diverge from the remaining West Germanic dialects. The diversion would eventually prove to have been strong enough to make these dialects become a separate subgroup within the West Germanic group of languages. The cause of it was a consonant shift that was primarily concerned with the transformation of the voiceless plosives [p], [t] and [k] into the voiceless fricatives [f], [s] and [x], respectively. The dialects affected by the consonant shift became known as High German, due to the fact that, as opposed to Low German in the lowlands of the north, they were spoken by the inhabitants Hradel 8 of the hilly and mountainous south. These changes are attested in Old High German, a literary language between the eighth and eleventh centuries AD. However, since a later High German dialect provided the basis for the first standardized variety of the German language, it is possible to illustrate the High German consonant shift by synchronically comparing and contrasting the affected words in contemporary German with their equivalents and cognates in English and Dutch. For example, the German word that corresponds to the English and Dutch word water happens to be Wasser. In some cases, the original plosive would be paired with the resulting fricative. As a result of this secondary type of the High German consonant shift, the English word apple and the Dutch word appel are found as Apfel in German, with the affricate [pf] occurring in the position of the usual West Germanic plosive [p]. Needless to say, Low German and Frisian remained unaffected by the High
Recommended publications
  • Tip #4 INFINITIVES 不定詞
    Tip #4 INFINITIVES 不定詞 Basic Guidelines Infinitive means “without limit”, and is one of a group of three special word forms called “verbals”: Verbal Type Functions Forms 1) infinitive (不定詞) (weak) noun to + verb (to) verb to find help (to) do 2) gerund (動名詞) (strong) noun verb-ing finding 3) participle (分詞) adjective verb-ing verb-ed having verb-ed finding found having found acting acted having acted To conquer unknown areas of science is Taro’s desire. “to conquer” = noun(名詞) and is used as the subject of the sentence The desire to conquer unknown areas of science is Taro’s. “to conquer” = adjective(形容詞) and describes what kind of desire Taro desires to conquer unknown areas of science. “to conquer” = a noun phrase that actually functions to describe “desire” Writers too often misuse the infinitive because they were mistaught, or because the concepts were never learned properly. When thinking of the word “infinitive”, associate the word “infinity” “without limitations”. Infinitive use more commonly communicates uncertainty and doubt—though more psychologically—and is often used in situations in which logic and future possibilities are stressed. The gerund(V-ing 動名詞)—likely mistaught as well—stresses the concept of certainty much more the infinitive, and often refers to things done or finished in the past; thus, things that are known or certain. In short many writers overuse the infinitive in today’s technical, scientific, and even business writing; and use the gerund too little. For numerous reasons dating back to the 1980s, the gerund has become more and more frequently used for stressing facts or factual-like information.
    [Show full text]
  • Old English: 450 - 1150 18 August 2013
    Chapter 4 Old English: 450 - 1150 18 August 2013 As discussed in Chapter 1, the English language had its start around 449, when Germanic tribes came to England and settled there. Initially, the native Celtic inhabitants and newcomers presumably lived side-by-side and the Germanic speakers adopted some linguistic features from the original inhabitants. During this period, there is Latin influence as well, mainly through missionaries from Rome and Ireland. The existing evidence about the nature of Old English comes from a collection of texts from a variety of regions: some are preserved on stone and wood monuments, others in manuscript form. The current chapter focusses on the characteristics of Old English. In section 1, we examine some of the written sources in Old English, look at some special spelling symbols, and try to read the runic alphabet that was sometimes used. In section 2, we consider (and listen to) the sounds of Old English. In sections 3, 4, and 5, we discuss some Old English grammar. Its most salient feature is the system of endings on nouns and verbs, i.e. its synthetic nature. Old English vocabulary is very interesting and creative, as section 6 shows. Dialects are discussed briefly in section 7 and the chapter will conclude with several well-known Old English texts to be read and analyzed. 1 Sources and spelling We can learn a great deal about Old English culture by reading Old English recipes, charms, riddles, descriptions of saints’ lives, and epics such as Beowulf. Most remaining texts in Old English are religious, legal, medical, or literary in nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Representation of Inflected Nouns in the Internal Lexicon
    Memory & Cognition 1980, Vol. 8 (5), 415423 Represeritation of inflected nouns in the internal lexicon G. LUKATELA, B. GLIGORIJEVIC, and A. KOSTIC University ofBelgrade, Belgrade, Yugoslavia and M.T.TURVEY University ofConnecticut, Storrs, Connecticut 06268 and Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, Connecticut 06510 The lexical representation of Serbo-Croatian nouns was investigated in a lexical decision task. Because Serbo-Croatian nouns are declined, a noun may appear in one of several gram­ matical cases distinguished by the inflectional morpheme affixed to the base form. The gram­ matical cases occur with different frequencies, although some are visually and phonetically identical. When the frequencies of identical forms are compounded, the ordering of frequencies is not the same for masculine and feminine genders. These two genders are distinguished further by the fact that the base form for masculine nouns is an actual grammatical case, the nominative singular, whereas the base form for feminine nouns is an abstraction in that it cannot stand alone as an independent word. Exploiting these characteristics of the Serbo­ Croatian language, we contrasted three views of how a noun is represented: (1) the independent­ entries hypothesis, which assumes an independent representation for each grammatical case, reflecting its frequency of occurrence; (2) the derivational hypothesis, which assumes that only the base morpheme is stored, with the individual cases derived from separately stored inflec­ tional morphemes and rules for combination; and (3) the satellite-entries hypothesis, which assumes that all cases are individually represented, with the nominative singular functioning as the nucleus and the embodiment of the noun's frequency and around which the other cases cluster uniformly.
    [Show full text]
  • Does English Have a Genitive Case? [email protected]
    2. Amy Rose Deal – University of Massachusetts, Amherst Does English have a genitive case? [email protected] In written English, possessive pronouns appear without ’s in the same environments where non-pronominal DPs require ’s. (1) a. your/*you’s/*your’s book b. Moore’s/*Moore book What explains this complementarity? Various analyses suggest themselves. A. Possessive pronouns are contractions of a pronoun and ’s. (Hudson 2003: 603) B. Possessive pronouns are inflected genitives (Huddleston and Pullum 2002); a morphological deletion rule removes clitic ’s after a genitive pronoun. Analysis A consists of a single rule of a familiar type: Morphological Merger (Halle and Marantz 1993), familiar from forms like wanna and won’t. (His and its contract especially nicely.) No special lexical/vocabulary items need be postulated. Analysis B, on the other hand, requires a set of vocabulary items to spell out genitive case, as well as a rule to delete the ’s clitic following such forms, assuming ’s is a DP-level head distinct from the inflecting noun. These two accounts make divergent predictions for dialects with complex pronominals such as you all or you guys (and us/them all, depending on the speaker). Since Merger operates under adjacency, Analysis A predicts that intervention by all or guys should bleed the formation of your: only you all’s and you guys’ are predicted. There do seem to be dialects with this property, as witnessed by the American Heritage Dictionary (4th edition, entry for you-all). Call these English 1. Here, we may claim that pronouns inflect for only two cases, and Merger operations account for the rest.
    [Show full text]
  • The Term Declension, the Three Basic Qualities of Latin Nouns, That
    Chapter 2: First Declension Chapter 2 covers the following: the term declension, the three basic qualities of Latin nouns, that is, case, number and gender, basic sentence structure, subject, verb, direct object and so on, the six cases of Latin nouns and the uses of those cases, the formation of the different cases in Latin, and the way adjectives agree with nouns. At the end of this lesson we’ll review the vocabulary you should memorize in this chapter. Declension. As with conjugation, the term declension has two meanings in Latin. It means, first, the process of joining a case ending onto a noun base. Second, it is a term used to refer to one of the five categories of nouns distinguished by the sound ending the noun base: /a/, /ŏ/ or /ŭ/, a consonant or /ĭ/, /ū/, /ē/. First, let’s look at the three basic characteristics of every Latin noun: case, number and gender. All Latin nouns and adjectives have these three grammatical qualities. First, case: how the noun functions in a sentence, that is, is it the subject, the direct object, the object of a preposition or any of many other uses? Second, number: singular or plural. And third, gender: masculine, feminine or neuter. Every noun in Latin will have one case, one number and one gender, and only one of each of these qualities. In other words, a noun in a sentence cannot be both singular and plural, or masculine and feminine. Whenever asked ─ and I will ask ─ you should be able to give the correct answer for all three qualities.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Gothic
    Introduction to Gothic By David Salo Organized to PDF by CommanderK Table of Contents 3..........................................................................................................INTRODUCTION 4...........................................................................................................I. Masculine 4...........................................................................................................II. Feminine 4..............................................................................................................III. Neuter 7........................................................................................................GOTHIC SOUNDS: 7............................................................................................................Consonants 8..................................................................................................................Vowels 9....................................................................................................................LESSON 1 9.................................................................................................Verbs: Strong verbs 9..........................................................................................................Present Stem 12.................................................................................................................Nouns 14...................................................................................................................LESSON 2 14...........................................................................................Strong
    [Show full text]
  • Oksana's BU Paper
    ACQUISITION of GENDER in RUSSIAN * Oksana Tarasenkova University of Connecticut 1 The Background In adult Russian grammar the gender feature of nouns is closely related to their declension class. Their relationship was a controversial question that evoked two opposing views regarding the way gender is represented in adult Russian grammar. The representatives of one view argue for gender to be derived from the noun declension class (Declension-to Gender account, Corbett 1982), while proponents of the opposite account argue for the reversed pattern, where the inflectional morphology can be predicted from the information on the noun gender along with a phonological cue (Gender-to-Declension account, Vinogradov 1960, Thelin 1975, Crockett 1976 among others). My goal is to focus on children’s acquisition of gender in Russian in order to compare these two major divisions of research. They provide different morphological analyses of gender forms in Russian; therefore this debate makes different predictions about the acquisition of gender by children. I tested these opposing predictions using children’s data gathered from an experiment to identify what exactly children rely on when assigning gender to nouns. The experiment results support the Declension-to-Gender view and provide evidence that children are significantly more successful at assigning gender to the novel nouns relying on the nominal declension paradigm rather than on the adjectival agreement. The way gender is represented in adults’ competence grammar might not necessarily be the correct model of children’s acquisition of gender. The child has to learn the gender of a significant number of nouns and extract the declensional paradigms first in order to then be able to learn and apply these redundancy rules for novel nouns.
    [Show full text]
  • Systemic Polyfunctionality and Morphology-Syntax Interdependencies
    Systemic polyfunctionality and morphology-syntax interdependencies Farrell Ackerman1 Olivier Bonami2 Irina Nikolaeva3 1University of California, San Diego 2Université Paris-Sorbonne 3SOAS Defaults in Morphological Theory Lexington, May 2012 The basic problem: Systemic Polyfunctionality Cross-linguistically person/number markers (PNMs) in verbal paradigms often exhibit similarities (up to identity) with person/number markers in nominal possessive constructions (Allen 1964, Radics 1980, Siewierska 1998, 2004, among others): When a language has distinct PNM paradigms for verbal subject (S/A) and object (O) indexing, a question arises: Which paradigm does the possessive paradigm align with? (1) Retuarã (Tucanoan) S/A alignment b˜ıre yi-ha¯a-a¯ Psi yi-behoa-pi 2SG 1SG-kill-NEG.IMP 1SG-spear-INSTR ‘(Be careful), lest I kill you with my spear’ (Strom 1992:63) (2) Kilivila (Central-Eastern Malayo-Polynesian) O alignment lube-gu ku-sake-gu buva friend-1SG 2SG-give-1SG betel_nut ‘My friend, do you give me betel nuts?’ (Senft 1986:53) The basic problem: Systemic Polyfunctionality Among the 130 relevant languages in Sierwieska’s (1998) sample she observes that, We see that [...], among the languages in the sample the affinities in form between the possessor affixes and the verbal person markers of the O (41%) are just marginally more common than those with the S/A (39%). (Siewierska 1998:2) There are, by hypothesis, systemic properties of specific grammars, rather than language independent universals, that explain the alignments observed. The languages compared by Siewierska appear to have distinct markers for S/A and O, and the question asked is which paradigm appears in possessive marking.
    [Show full text]
  • Objective and Subjective Genitives
    Objective and Subjective Genitives To this point, there have been three uses of the Genitive Case. They are possession, partitive, and description. Many genitives which have been termed possessive, however, actually are not. When a Genitive Case noun is paired with certain special nouns, the Genitive has a special relationship with the other noun, based on the relationship of a noun to a verb. Many English and Latin nouns are derived from verbs. For example, the word “love” can be used either as a verb or a noun. Its context tells us how it is being used. The patriot loves his country. The noun country is the Direct Object of the verb loves. The patriot has a great love of his country. The noun country is still the object of loving, but now loving is expressed as a noun. Thus, the genitive phrase of his country is called an Objective Genitive. You have actually seen a number of Objective Genitives. Another common example is Rex causam itineris docuit. The king explained the cause of the journey (the thing that caused the journey). Because “cause” can be either a noun or a verb, when it is used as a noun its Direct Object must be expressed in the Genitive Case. A number of Latin adjectives also govern Objective Genitives. For example, Vir miser cupidus pecuniae est. A miser is desirous of money. Some special nouns and adjectives in Latin take Objective Genitives which are more difficult to see and to translate. The adjective peritus, -a, - um, meaning “skilled” or “experienced,” is one of these: Nautae sunt periti navium.
    [Show full text]
  • Genitive Case
    GENITIVE CASE The Genitive is the third and last case existing in both English and Latin. In English, all pronouns have a genitive case that shows possession: "his", "her", "my", "their", "whose", etc. These answer the question "Belonging to whom or what?" Regular nouns in English also have a genitive form: in the singular, the ending "'s" is added; in the plural, s'. Consider the following examples: Their father is here. The man's father is here. The boys' father is here. In Latin, the Genitive case may also show possession. However, it may be used for some other things as well, as you will see later on. It's ending of course varies depending on the original ending of the noun: for a-nouns, the singular is -ae and the plural is -ārum; for both us- and um-nouns, the singular is -ī and the plural is - ōrum. Consider the following chart: Nominative, Accusative, and Genitive Cases a-nouns us-nouns um-nouns sg. pl. sg. pl. sg. pl. Nominative a ae us ī um a Accusative Genitive ae ārum ī ōrum ī ōrum A genitive is normally paired with another noun in the sentence which it modifies. In English, it is always placed immediately before the noun it modifies: for example, "my soup", "the boy's shirt", etc. But in Latin, a genitive may be placed either before or after the noun it modifies: for example, feminae panes, panes feminae. In fact, a genitive may occasionally even be separated by another word: panes sunt feminae. Also, keep in mind that the grammatical possession that the genitive case signifies is a fairly broad and vague connection.
    [Show full text]
  • Finnish Partitive Case As a Determiner Suffix
    Finnish partitive case as a determiner suffix Problem: Finnish partitive case shows up on subject and object nouns, alternating with nominative and accusative respectively, where the interpretation involves indefiniteness or negation (Karlsson 1999). On these grounds some researchers have proposed that partitive is a structural case in Finnish (Vainikka 1993, Kiparsky 2001). A problematic consequence of this is that Finnish is assumed to have a structural case not found in other languages, losing the universal inventory of structural cases. I will propose an alternative, namely that partitive be analysed instead as a member of the Finnish determiner class. Data: There are three contexts in which the Finnish subject is in the partitive (alternating with the nominative in complementary contexts): (i) indefinite divisible non-count nouns (1), (ii) indefinite plural count nouns (2), (iii) where the existence of the argument is completely negated (3). The data are drawn from Karlsson (1999:82-5). (1) Divisible non-count nouns a. Partitive mass noun = indef b. c.f. Nominative mass noun = def Purki-ssa on leipä-ä. Leipä on purki-ssa. tin-INESS is bread-PART Bread is tin-INESS ‘There is some bread in the tin.’ ‘The bread is in the tin.’ (2) Plural count nouns a. Partitive count noun = indef b. c.f. Nominative count noun = def Kadu-lla on auto-j-a. Auto-t ovat kadulla. Street-ADESS is.3SG car-PL-PART Car-PL are.3PL street-ADESS ‘There are cars in the street.’ ‘The cars are in the street.’ (3) Negation a. Partitive, negation of existence b. c.f.
    [Show full text]
  • SPLIT-ERGATIVITY in HITTITE Petra Goedegebuure (University of Chicago)
    Published in: Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie. Volume 102, Issue 2, Pages 270–303, ISSN (Online) 1613-1150, ISSN (Print) 0084-5299, DOI: 10.1515/za- 2012-0015, January 2013 1 SPLIT-ERGATIVITY IN HITTITE Petra Goedegebuure (University of Chicago) “it is possible that all languages show ergativity on some level” (McGregor 2009, 482) 1. Introduction2 As a highly heterogeneous phenomenon ergativity remains a conundrum for linguistic theory. The ergative case has been treated as a structural case, an inherent/lexical case, or rather as a mix (Butt 2006). Split-ergativity is thought to arise as an epiphenomenon, as ‘collateral damage’ of diachronic change after reinterpretation of passive constructions with instrumentals (Dixon 1994) or through reanalysis of transitive null-subject clauses with inanimate instrumentals (Garrett 1990b). Alternatively, case assignment and therefore also split-ergativity ultimately depends on synchronic structural properties of the clause (Merchant 2006). It has been claimed that only 25% of the world’s languages shows ergativity (Van de Visser 2006), or that “all languages show ergativity on some level” (McGregor 2009, 482). Irrespective of the correct ratio, split-ergativity seems to be the norm among languages that show ergativity. When the ergative split is based on semantic features of noun phrases, it is generally assumed that animacy plays a major role. Silverstein (1976) has shown that pronouns and nouns can be hierarchically arranged based on semantic features such as person, number, or grammatical gender. The strength of this hierarchy is that if agent marking is attested for the first time at a certain point in the hierarchy, all nominals lower in the hierarchy will carry agent marking as well.
    [Show full text]